David,
I guess you must have unlimited time and focus to argue this the rest of your life.
. . .
Is arguing about the attribution of a golf course on the other side of the country every day on the Internet really what you want as your life's work?
I write one response to a days worth of nonsense, and you lecture me on my time management? Give me a break!
You posted over a dozen times yesterday on this issue alone! You know what the Merion Committee minutes say. Please don't act dumb as one of your best friends has seen them and all of us have told you essentially what they say.
I have a good idea of what they say based on what you and TEPaul and Wayne have leaked (and what you haven't leaked) but I haven't discussed them with any friends who have seen the information. Apparently my friends and I have a different sense of honor and ethics than yours. Not keeping your word appears to be commonplace in your neck of the woods, but not in mine.
Speaking of which . . .
You know my feelings on a Cobb's Creek restoration, I've expressed them publicly and privately. But by all means don't let your word to me get in the way of your unnamed friends' paranoia.
So, in good faith I'll offer a trade....
Good faith? Good faith isn't a deal, a trade, or a guarantee. It is upright behavior without assurances. That is the "faith" part. For example, good faith was providing you with the Wash Post article on Barker, and the synopsis of Columbia's early history including that Ross had reportedly gone after the job. Good faith was providing you with a photo of Ward playing NGLA in 1909, and explaining my interpretation of the confusion over the two tournaments. That was my Good Faith for the last few days. Longer term, my good faith was posting my essay here and opening up my research for a complete vetting, despite your irrational (and continued) paranoia and insults about my intentions. My good faith was providing Wayne with my research, my interpretations, and my explanations. My good faith trusting his word that he would provide me with his. My good faith was trusting his word that he would offer me a detailed critique of my work, with support.
I've given you all that in good faith, and more. in fact, dealing with you at all is a major leap of faith after the garbage you've sent my way. As far as I can tell, you have been acting in bad faith with me from the beginning. Others started later when acting ethically began no longer matched their various agendas.
You come forward today with how you "Know" that Merion was designed by someone other than Wilson and Committee and I'll send you the research book we created on Cobb's Creek.
I think you need to get a hold of yourself, and look a little more closely at what I wrote above, and to what I was responding.
"And, by the way, I know you are mistaken and can prove it, but why bother when you won't offer any support whatsoever?"
If I were you, I'd make of it, that I
know TEPaul is mistaken and if he'd like to get to the bottom of it, then I'd be glad to discuss all the facts with him, but won't discuss all the facts without seeing all the facts.
Is this a game?
I don't know. Is it? You are the one offering up information, then refusing to provide it. You are the one who keeps demanding we answer your questions and provide you with our research, but I don't recall you answering mine or producing anything. You are one of those making claims without offering any support. So you tell me, Mike, is this a game? And if so what are the rules and to whom do they apply.
You claim that this isn't a personal vendetta to make Tom and Wayne look foolish, but then you claim you KNOW that Wilson and Committee didn't design Merion but unless Tom throws his cards first, you won't tell everyone else here??
First Mike, you, Wayne Morrison, Tom Paul, and Joe Bausch are the ones making unsupported claims and withholding information, not me.
Second, as usual you did not understand my post or my point, have it all garbled in your mind. You seem to have failed to realize that it was TEPaul who withheld information, not me. When he comes forward with that information, then his mistake will be evident.
Third, this agenda stuff is a bunch of crap. I am not the one who broke of the exchange of ideas and cooperation. I tried to cooperate in GOOD FAITH, but have been shown only BAD FAITH. It is quite clear to anyone paying attention who has the agenda. What could be more agenda driven than running a PR campaign about Merion's early history while refusing to produce the support.
It is ridiculous that you expect me to offer evidence to disprove a claim that hasn't even been supported (and cannot be) supported.
Is it no fun unless you can prove someone else wrong??
I have no desire to prove anyone wrong, I just want to get to the truth. The truth is being masked and hidden in instead we have this masquerade of claims of "proof" when no such "proof" has been forthcoming. I'll be glad to have an open and frank discussion of the source material, but I'll be damned if I am going to continue to act in good faith when you guys are so obviously acting in bad faith.
Do you have any respect or consideration for anyone here??
I have respect and consideration for some, but have lost or am losing most of the respect and consideration I had for others.
But why is my "respect" contingent upon me coming forward with everything immediately, yet yours is not? and Waynes and TEPaul's are not? And Joe's is not? Why is it that for Tom and I we have to produce everything immediately or be condemned and criticized for being disrespectful and playing games, but you guys do this song and dance daily? That is game playing Mike, and it is your game, not mine.
Have you no respect or consideration for anyone here? How about Wayne and TomP. If they had any respect and consideration, then why would they be playing these games?
Why won't you answer my quesitions about the Columbia clipping or the "laying out" issue. It seems pretty important in all these docussions, including your Cobb's discussion.